Forum Replies Created
I would also like to clarify that I freely used the term yichud d’oraisa which is a borrowed term. The exact issur d’oraisa is lo s’karev according to the opinion of the Rambam.
rabbiofberlin: “I perused the comments on this matter just recently and, as I have always said, people on this website do NOT learn, they just parrot what they MIGHT have heard. Mr. Geshmakenstein’s latest posting is a perfect example of this.
He writes (and oomis1105 repeats it): ‘yichud is prohibited [with an unmarried woman] and has the severity of yihud d’oraisa ,due to her being a nidah”.
I don’t know know where Mr. geshmakenstein learned his gemoro and halachos but his facts are WRONG. Mi-d’oraisa ,only yichud with an ‘ervah” or married woman is prohibited. “bais din shel dovid gozru al hapenuyah”. The Bet Din of dovid hamelech forbade yichud with a “pnuyah” (unmarried woman)because of the story of Amnon and Tamar. (look it up ,geniuses)”
If rabbiofberlin would pay a little more attention he would realize that a nida is an erva. The penuya that is only asur mederabanon is when she is tahor, which was common during the time of the beis hamikdash, whereas nowadays unmarried women don’t toivel. Also kalla b’lo bracha asura l’baala k’nida means that she is miderabanan an erva, because a nida is an erva. And I learned Halacha and Gemara from someone that was obviously a better teacher than yours because you seem to have trouble comprehending that a nida is an erva, which is a posuk in chumash. The only one that gave you semicha is yourself.
Also oomis1105 I looked up the gemara with bruria, and I correct myself that it is not eruvin 42b like I quoted before, but eruvin 53b. And the Tana was R’ Yossi haGlili.
“Keep in mind that the Rambam lived in a society and time when wife-beating was condoned. You sometimes have to look at a halacha in the context of the environment in which it was issued. No one lives in a vacuum.
As anyone even remotely familiar with Rambam can attest, Rambam seldom makes statements in Yad that are not explicit in gemara or midrashim ,at least according to his understanding thereof, and in the instances where he states an opinion of his own he makes a disclaimer. Hence, it is hard to say that historical context influenced the halacha. It seems that the discussion here is ignoring the context of the halacha itself. Striking is only permitted when the wife refuses to do her duties. It is not a beating as punishment, but only to make her do those duties. As soon as she agrees to do those duties if the husband hit her he is punished. Also, does it say in Rambam that the husband is the one to hit? Beis Din in many instances uses physical mean to force someone to fulfill their obligation, and this would seem to be similar. (Tosfos, however, often interprets kefias Beis Din as verbal throughout shas.)
“A place not frequented by people who are religous fanatics and yet so ignorant at the same time.”
Just because someone doesn’t agree with you does not mean that he is ignorant or fanatical as an ‘openminded’ person would undoubtedly agree.
The fact is that if nothing else seminaries are a means of stereotyping in today’s information overload crisis mode shiduch market. However, its worth considering if you want to be stereotyped, or if you are connected enough that you don’t need to be.
oomis1105: “This is the first time I have ever heard my life that being a kallah is an erva.
I haven’t read this book, so I cannot intelligently comment on it, but having said that, anyone can write a book about anything, including a rabbi. Could someone please educate me as to the makor for a kallah being erva(not just the totally correct idea that a chosson and kallah have to be extra careful not to get caught up in hormones and emotions, which could lead them to be nichshal, but an actual makor that says the kallah is erva).”
Kalla b’lo bracha asura lebaala kenida (kesubos). Also any unmarried woman is assumed to be a nida which is an erva d’oraisa. Note that yichud is prohibited and has the severity of yichud d’oraisa due to her being a nida.
Perhaps oomis1105 can be kind enough to the unlettered among us & cite a source for the contention that R’ Yossi was specifically known for his opinion on the conduct between man and woman?
The aptly named rabbiofberlin keeps bring up the Holocaust as the basis for his rejection of the Gedolim’s guidance in worldly matters. So 20th century!! The Tora itself is quite clear on the punishment of a generation that doesn’t follow his will, and that even tzaddikim can be punished at such times. The gemara inChelek says clearly that if klal yisroel doesn’t do teshuva then Hashem brings a melech like Haman. I think Hitler fits the bill. His rise to power was clearly yad Hashem not a natural event. It logically follows then that the correct response is teshuva not running to America, where the same unnatural punishment would still be possible.
Why is it so ridiculous to chip in for the expenses and planning? The frum concept of dating is as a means to meet a spouse, not romance. If people would check the soap opera mind set by the door it would help more to resolve the shidduch crisis than all of nasi’s hype.
oomis1105 is misquoting the gemara in eruvin 42b, it does not say that Bruria’s claim was that R’ Yossi haGlili was hypocritical but rather that the Chazal say not to speak excessively with women. It is true for everyone.
I’d like to note the similarity between rabbiofberlin’s artificial differentiation between halacha and ‘general interest’ and Moses Mendellsohn’s contention that the Tora does not require any particular beliefs and one is free to decide on ones own. Hashkofas haTora is that Hashem’s will is all inclusive, and the most informed people to guide us are the Gedolei Yisroel, due to their immersion in the study of the Tora and the their greatness in mitzvos and the development of true Tora personalities. They are simply more in tune with Hashem;s will. It has nothing to do with infallibility. Today’s Gedolim are the first to admit their flaws and their comparative stature relative to previous generations. Nobody is claiming to be nevi’im or even to have ruach hakodesh. Just know your place and the quality of your perception.
As long as we are on the topic can anyone explain the quote from the rebbe himself that the reason that one can “daven” to a rebbe is because he is “Atzmus u’Mahus vi Ir hut Zich areingeshtelt in a guf?” Sounds way out there to me!
I think that the real question is why do we make up arbitrary things for guys to do. Protect the girls from intruders?! Get real! What does she do every day when she comes home from work or from a chasuna at night? Most friends don’t walk each other to the door, so who all of a sudden decided that its mentchlich? Waiting until she’s in the house is basic safety and menshlich. Many of the other points are halacha questions and not matters of opinion.